[#927] UnboundMethod#to_proc — Dave Thomas <dave@...>
I'm wondering what I can do with a Proc generated by
17 messages
2003/04/06
[#929] Re: UnboundMethod#to_proc
— "Chris Pine" <nemo@...>
2003/04/06
----- Original Message -----
[#934] Re: UnboundMethod#to_proc
— Mathieu Bouchard <matju@...>
2003/04/06
[#940] Re: UnboundMethod#to_proc
— chr_news@...
2003/04/07
>
[#941] Re: UnboundMethod#to_proc
— Dave Thomas <dave@...>
2003/04/07
>> If they have diverging interfaces such that the contracts conflict
[#936] docs on implementation of ruby and/or ruby-gc ? — Ruben Vandeginste <Ruben.Vandeginste@...>
4 messages
2003/04/07
[#964] Range in logical context — Dave Thomas <dave@...>
If I run
7 messages
2003/04/16
[#965] Re: Range in logical context
— Mauricio Fern疣dez <batsman.geo@...>
2003/04/16
On Thu, Apr 17, 2003 at 06:10:40AM +0900, Dave Thomas wrote:
[#973] problem with rb_rescue2() ? — Mathieu Bouchard <matju@...>
5 messages
2003/04/19
Re: problem with rb_rescue2() ?
From:
Mathieu Bouchard <matju@...>
Date:
2003-04-19 06:37:42 UTC
List:
ruby-core #977
On Sat, 19 Apr 2003, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
> means rb_gc_mark() was called with non Ruby object pointer, which
> should not happen.
>
> |#5 0x404776fa in rb_gc_mark (ptr=3221202272) at gc.c:513
> This is a problem (ptr=3221202272=0xbfffa560), and line rb_gc_mark()
> is called from
> |#13 0x4047834b in rb_gc () at gc.c:1240
well, indirectly from... at the very least I'm not using neither
rb_register_address() nor rb_global_variable().
Giving you the intermediary backtrace from frame 5 to frame 13:
#5 0x404776fa in rb_gc_mark (ptr=3221202272) at gc.c:513
#6 0x4047753d in rb_gc_mark (ptr=135359908) at gc.c:786
#7 0x40476de2 in mark_entry (key=4849, value=135359908) at gc.c:552
#8 0x404bf466 in st_foreach (table=0x8265e68, func=0x40476dc4
<mark_entry>,
arg=0) at st.c:495
#9 0x40476e18 in rb_mark_tbl (tbl=0x8265e68) at gc.c:561
#10 0x404775ab in rb_gc_mark (ptr=135359928) at gc.c:809
#11 0x40476d6d in mark_locations_array (x=0xbfff9e58, n=3412) at gc.c:525
#12 0x40476dbd in rb_gc_mark_locations (start=0xbfffd3a4, end=0xbfff9e58)
at gc.c:544
#13 0x4047834b in rb_gc () at gc.c:1240
I gather that this value was found in a hashtable. However further
investigation shows me that this is the pointer of a table of VALUEs
called "argv" that is on the stack and that I certainly have not added to
any hashtable at all...
WOOPS. I had made a typo, writing rb_funcall() instead of rb_funcall2().
(and since all I was getting _yet_ were NameErrors, I couldn't otherwise
notice.)
This closes this bug, which is unfortunately not the same bug as I've had
in my other extensions. I wish I could fix that other one.
Thanks.
________________________________________________________________
Mathieu Bouchard http://artengine.ca/matju